Web-only letters to the editor

Friday

Dispatch.com regularly will post letters to the editor that don't make it to print in The Dispatch. Unlike letters to the editor that appear in the newspaper, Web-only letters have not been edited.

Dispatch.com regularly will post letters to the editor that don't make it to print in The Dispatch. Unlike letters to the editor that appear in the newspaper, Web-only letters have not been edited.

Taxing the wealthy

A recent AP article (published April 13th in The Dispatch) cites a lack of public clamor to raise taxes on the wealthiest Americans as part of the plan to solve our budget woes. This, despite the fact that economists, by-partisan committees, pundits and think tanks concluding that increasing tax revenues from the very rich is an essential element to any meaningful solution.

So why are we not clamoring? Perhaps it is not just the GOP that views 'the rich as our rightful rulers' as noted in a recent Newsweek headline, but deep down we all do. Might it be that rank and file middle class Americans are sheepish when it comes to asking those best situated to pay more to close the gaping budget gap? Truly, we shouldn't be. Those who enjoy an elevated economic status do so entirely due to a large, stable and thriving middle class.

Not only are we all united as citizens of a great democracy, but we are all also united as critical elements of this vast economic machine. The rich are as threatened by this crisis as are the middle-class. They just perceive themselves as insulated, because at the moment, their wealth is continuing to increase both proportionately and in real economic terms. But if we allow them to 'continue as our rightful rulers' while the middle class continues to decline and the poverty rate grows, that insulation will erode both economically and politically. History has proven this time and again.

Of course, human nature being what it is, the wealthy are in no hurry to pay more. So they have convinced themselves, the GOP and many middle-class Americans that increased taxes on the wealthiest Americans should not be part of the solution. They appeal to the common sense notion that government can no longer afford itself. Then, as a bait and switch tactic, they point out that our schools are broken and that the welfare system needs to be dismantled. Then they connect these separate issues, by pointing out the vast sums of money spent on these programs. We need to stop throwing good money after bad, the argument goes. Especially when we can't afford it. Taxes are not the answer, spending cuts are.

The problem with this argument is that we can afford it, at least most of it, if we are willing to marginally increase taxes on the truly wealthy. Moreover, the drastic cuts in welfare and education currently proposed are no substitute for real solutions. Indeed, any meaningful reform to those systems, which inarguably are necessary, would likely increase their costs before ultimately lowering them.

Ordinarily, our government should allow those who generate wealth to hang on to it. But these are not ordinary times, so we the vast middle class, must not be sheepish, and START CLAMORING.

Carol Beckerle, Bexley

Tired students

Joy Dancer is offended by students complaining they are tired. "Tired students should quit their whining" (Letters to the Editor, 4/25/11) , chastising by comparison, the plight of their peers serving in the armed forces in Iraq and Afghanistan who are not getting a break. "Tired students finally catch a break" (Dispatch, 4/19/11) was just a catchy way for a writer to mention the annual rite of spring vacation. I doubt most people gave it a second thought. Ms. Dancer counters that students/teachers are "whiners". I seriously doubt any of them called the Dispatch to complain about being tired. As well, I am sure every one of them appreciates what our armed forces are doing. Ms. Dancer is who should give it a break as she is too quick to judge.

Kris Christensen, Russells Point

Education system

Does South High struggle because of lack of effort and involvement by teachers and staff, or because of lack of involvement and commitment from its community, parents, and students? When a school exists in a culture of poverty (Ruby Payne), education is not seen as a practical or necessary means of improving one's life.

The Dispatch article about children in poverty areas coming to school with major deficits (Getting out of the blocks) clearly points out how lack of early learning educationally or behaviorally - at home in the critical 0-5 years has resulted in children being unable to deal with learning in the average classroom setting. What if as a parent you've never learned that stimulating early learning in your children by reading to, counting with, naming colors and letters, or just letting children play with crayons, markers, or scissors needs to be done, even if it makes a "mess" or takes your time? What about being told that your child needs immediate early intervention (physical, mental, or behavioral)? Do you react defensively, denying test results, refusing to follow up, or not even being willing to change the home situations that are causing the problems?

What kind of message does this send to your child regarding education? That when redirected, asked to change their behavior, or asked to do class work or homework, they are to refuse, throw a tantrum, call home to get support for their negative behavior, or to get out of whatever school expectations that would help them become a productive member of society? Sadly, the message sent and received by children from an early age is that you just do your state-mandated "school time" and then drop out.

What if this negative attitude gets passed on through generations that have adjusted to the "normalcy" of problems in school, poverty, early pregnancy, substance use, violence, hostility and/or distrust toward "do-gooders" and educators, and dependency on others for your needs? Nothing productive can result.

Does this mean that there aren't individuals or families who DO choose to use education as a means of change and improvement? Of course! Those are the shining stars who demand that their children work hard, behave in class, learn positive social skills, and stay in school and graduate. They are parents who willingly stand against peer and anti-education pressures to drop out or get pregnant at an early age. They are the ones who work WITH their schools to provide the opportunities they never had, but want for their children and grandchildren. They are the ones who know they can break the cycle or culture of poverty through education. They prove one can fight against the generational "poverty normalcy" mentality. But if the individual and corporate community members don't get involved in changing their families' futures by changing how they see their personal role in learning, schools are left to fight the battle against poverty by themselves.

The administration of Columbus schools is well aware that a negative cultural attitude within poverty schools can hamper even the best educators' efforts. It exists in more urban schools than just South High School. Maybe it is time to look realistically at schools where perhaps the traditional college-prep curriculum needs to be supplemented with a vocational education parallel curriculum. Not a curriculum that takes the students out of their home schools, to attend one of the vocational schools in the area, but a vocational training program WITHIN their existing school buildings or community. Parents could see clearly the value of such a job-training curriculum. Adult education, early childhood training, or parenting classes could be developed within that community, further promoting an understanding of the value of learning from birth through adulthood, producing a knowledgeable, skilled work force.

I grew up in a rural area of Ohio where the option of going into a vocational program ran parallel to those in the college-prep programs. Both programs were within the same buildings, so all students continued interacting and participating in the same activities as their community peers band, sports, etc. Students, who were not inclined to go to college, were still inclined to graduate with their classmates. The peer pressure was for completion of your education, whichever path you chose. As a result, our graduation rate was very high.

I recognize that consolidated vocational schools make sense on the level of economics (shared resources), but within some communities, perhaps a second look toward an inclusive parallel traditional/vocational curriculum needs to be made. Perhaps communities could be revived if active local businesses and vacant business properties were utilized as educational sites as a part of an inclusive "campus" approach. I think it's time to look at the potential impact of changing a community's poverty culture, as found in some of our area schools, by thinking outside the box, instead of simply blaming the teachers and administrators who are required to continue following mandated state and district directives, whether they work or not. Teachers have only a 6 hour impact time each day. The community and its families have the rest. Let's put our communities to work as partners in improving their families' future. Only that can make a lasting difference and produce a positive, generational change. We can't afford to wait.

Pam Lucas, Columbus

Never miss a story

Choose the plan that's right for you.
Digital access or digital and print delivery.